This question is for those who have shot over 90% at 3d on more than a couple of occasions:

Were you shooting split finger, or three under?

I have, only shooting split.

What does 90% mean? 90% hearts, i.e., 9 out of 10 shots are hearts? If so, I haven't.

Percentage is the only logical way to score so as to rate progress. If you shoot a 40 target round, you had a possible score of 400. So if you shoot 360 or higher, you were above 90%.

I have done it a couple of times and shoot split, but i am more of an 80-85 percent shooter. I basically shoot split vision and split finger.

Thank you RJH1

last three el paso 3d's 30 targets so 300 possible 289 276 278. 3 under string walk, the first 2 scores I missed a target on each shoot. they count 11's I had quite a few so that helps. bow weight 50 lbs to 55 lbs depending on which bow I took. all 66'' to 70'' bows

289 was a nice score. Have you always shot that way lamb?

It sounds though that the possible score was 330 correct? If you counted 11's!

330 would be correct. to shoot all 11's I don't think superman could do it. haha i've stringwalk probably last 15 years. so much easier

90% is the goal I set for myself now. Prior to attending Rod Jenkins shooting clinic my goal had always been to get thru a round with no misses. I could not get close to 90%, I was usually at about 70-75%. But since the clinic and a few years of steady work I get to 90% at about half of the events. I shoot 3 under and use point on, gap, or string walk when rules allow, but it is not about the 3 under or split, it is about the consistent shooting process, pulling thru the shot being the biggie.

I shoot split finger

Interesting. If I understand this right, it would work something like this. A typical scoring is 10 for heart, 8 for lungs and 5 for body. Thus, on a 30 target course, to achieve a 90% score (270), one would have to shoot half hearts and half lungs, no bodies or misses.

I've been at this since before foam 3D targets were invented, and I've seen darn few folks who could shoot that kind of score. In local shoots I've attended over the past 30 years or so, that score will take the top prize 90% of the time, maybe not in state or national competitions, but certainly local.

Must have a lot of really good shooters on this site.

There are other ways to shoot 270 (90%), of course. Could have a miss or two and a body shot or two, but then would have to shoot a whole lot more hearts.

Hearts are huge targets. We usually count 12s around here...

"Interesting. If I understand this right, it would work something like this. A typical scoring is 10 for heart, 8 for lungs and 5 for body. Thus, on a 30 target course, to achieve a 90% score (270), one would have to shoot half hearts and half lungs, no bodies or misses. I've been at this since before foam 3D targets were invented, and I've seen darn few folks who could shoot that kind of score. In local shoots I've attended over the past 30 years or so, that score will take the top prize 90% of the time, maybe not in state or national competitions, but certainly local."

This is very true and a 9 point average on a round is hard to do and few shooters can do it, much less do it consistently. Like i said i have only done it a few times and generally hover in the 8-8.5 ppt range and most everywhere i shoot uses 12s. This year, after taking some off, i struggled to get my scores where they have been in the past, I think 259 is the best i have scored this year, so far. I have shot with people that consistently shoot above 9 ppt and one guy i have shot with has shot over 10ppt at least twice, maybe more. He is a hell of a shot. He shoots split with a glove and instinctive.

If you want to shoot 90% (scoring only 10/8/5/0, no 11s or 12s) you have to shoot 4 10s to off set every 5. So, if you avoid shooting 5s, it gets a lot easier. Zeros will almost surely kill your chances to reach 90%.

One more point, if the event is counting 11s or 12s, it gets even harder to reach 90% because of the difficulty of hitting the small 11/12 ring. 25 targets is a possible 275 counting 11s or 300 if counting 12s. 90% would be 248 if counting 11s or 270 if counting 12s. I prefer to not count 11s or 12s. Generally speaking, hitting the small center needs a very high level of skill but also a lot of luck too.

The key is to not shoot any 5's. It can be done. So are we counting 11's or not?

When I started in shooting 3d it was 1997. Nearly every course was scored 10-8-5. For whatever reason over the years various clubs have tried other scoring methods. I'll be shooting a course tomorrow where they score 20-8-5.

I carry a notebook and record how many 10's, 8's, and 5's for the shoot. I turn in my score card using what ever method they have decided on, but my personal record lets me track my own progress in a consistent manner.

And you're right, 5's suck.

It's hard to shoot a 297 for 30 targets.

I average around 70% or maybe a hair more. My goal is to have 100% of the fun - but 80% would make me happy too ;-)

The club putting on the event decides the scoring.

It depends on the shoot--- some of the ones ive been to have set targets up with most shots falling between 10-20 yds--- ive hit the 90% mark there--- but those were a rare few occasions for me. Other shoots range out past 30 yds--- ive not done as well at those...

I shoot 3 under and gap at the bow.

Some shoots only allow 8 & 10...5 is a wound, a bad shot.

Even less popular, some shoots treat wounds as negative scores... You go into the shot with 200, come out of the shot with 195.

I think I've only been to a couple of shoots like either one over the past 15-20 years....

Both seem reasonable.... why should we feel good about bad shots?

3 under

Orion went on a track that I thought of immediately. Shooting the blue face indoors is 60 arrows at 20 yds, 5 max for 300. I'm betting over 99% here can't shoot 270 now.

It's not that hard if you think of it this way (no sights of course). All you have to do is keep 60 arrows in the 4 ring and make sure half or 30 arrows are in the 5 ring - 270.

It gets to be more mental than physical. I know I couldn't do it now, come September probably. In my younger days I've passed that mark in competition lots with my PB 279. Not very good with the above thought in mind - I had a 3.

Bowmania

I’ve done it a few times and shoot split. The new course I go to only has 1 stake. Made for compounds. Quite a few shots over 50 yards and 1 that has to be nearly 100 yards. I’ve lost half a dozen arrows with all the rocks up there and such. Even has a running bear. No one has approached the 90% yet haha

Distance is a huge factor, that why it’s hard to compare from course to course. Having said that we shoot an indoor league 3-D shots average between 15 to 20 yards. Scoring 10 8 5 for 3 arrows per target 21 times. My best is 610 out of a possible 630. Outside at longer course never so good.

We score 5,8,10,12 at shoots here and best I've ever seen anybody shoot is about 75% and normally it's more like 70%! But that's from people shooting their elk/deer hunting rigs. I would sincerely love to see somebody shoot 90% at one of our shoots, I don't know a single person in this area that competes nationally in trad, we have some compound shooters that do though and I don't even think they hit 90% on a 40 target course with a 480 possibly total score. I've heard but don't know how true it is that our local shoots are set up more like hunting shots versus a high end competition shots. If you can shoot that good, come on out to Colorado, you'll clean up!

In the last 2 years I've been shooting, other than indoor, all of my out door shooting is 3D. Around here, that's all they offer. However, 35+ year ago, there wasn't any 3D that I know of, so everything was either Field Archery or P.A.A. round. Never got into F.I.T.A. style like my friend/competitor John Williams.

I think there is some clarification on how everyone i know scores and accounts for percent on 3D. Considering a 30 shot course with 12,10,8,5 scoring most people are going to consider a 300 100 percent and anything over that in the "bonus." 12 rings are even commonly called "bonus" rings. So maybe points per target would be a more precise/standard/clear way of looking at this topic. Earlier in this thread when i say i have done 90 percent, I was talking about shooting 270+ on a 30 shot course. Now if you consider a 30 shot course as 360 points cause you include the bonus rings, i was nowhere near 90 percent, but like i said, I have never heard it discussed that way. Anyway hope that makes my earlier post a little clearer

Around here, "most people" call that shooting even plus or minus, as in a 405 score on a 40 target course being +5 and a 400 score being even. I've seen a few scores right at 90%, best I've done is 75- 80% and that was shooting a hunting bow North of 50# shooting arrows on the 10gpp. Been slipping past couple years though and not any where near that now!

It really depends on the shoot itself. One of our local traditional shoots scores 10 for heart/lung, 0 for a miss, and -10 for a wound. The course has been shot clean (300 on 30 targets). A similar traditional shoot in southern WI scores 30 targets, 2 arrows per target, 10 for heart/lung, 0 for everything else. It also gets shot clean every year (600).

For normal IBO scoring (10, 8, 5, 0 with bonus 11) the top shooters at Traditional World and open World in RU will score well over 9 points per target. Usually around 9.5. At the IBO Indoor World there have been three RU shooters score over 10 points per target (400+ on 40 targets). This in on IBO championship courses, which are usually a lot more challenging than a normal local traditional 3-D. The last year I shot Indoor Worlds the very first target was a 32-yard wolverine. They didn't get much easier after that.

I guess I derive my view from years and years of shooting NRA PPC courses. A very competitive field that had a process for scoring laid out a long long time ago.

A 1500 match consists of 150 shots, each a possible 10. The little X ring in the center was just that, an X ring. No extra points, but you counted them to use as tie breakers.

Not sure why archery can't use the same standard but you know how it is, everybody has to do it their own way.

Last year I shot one course a number of times that scores 20-15-5. Is there some logic to it, nope, just they way they like to do it.

My real question on this topic was to see the ratio of better than average shooters doing 3 under vs. split.

Since the 11 ring is about one ninth the size of the ten ring, it's not a real factor for many. Yesterday I shot a 207 with zero 11's on 30 targets. Which would be 69% of 300 possible, or 62.7% of a possible 330. Not a great score in absolutes, but it was possibly the toughest course I've ever shot, and I was okay with my performance (except a few major screw-ups!)

PS I shoot three-under, since tthe OP is looking for that data.

Thanks Dana.

“My real question on this topic was to see the ratio of better than average shooters doing 3 under vs. split.”

This is arbitrary at best if there is no common ground like a 300 round. My PB split fingers 300 round was 272 split-vision. 3under until now is 281 stringwalking. On new 3D course, unknown distances and targets the way you hold the fingers on the string count very little if the shot sequence is consistent and the aiming method is compatible with someone’s bow and arrow choice. There are opinions that all should use 3under on 3D course but if someone watches WA 3D competitions for Instinctive division will see that is not quite a rule.

Three-under

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here